The Anglobitch Thesis contends that the brand of feminism that arose in the Anglosphere (the English-speaking world) in the 1960s has an ulterior misandrist (anti-male) agenda quite distinct from its self-proclaimed role as ‘liberator’ of women.

Wednesday, 31 January 2018

A poster called Lawrence
has written a brilliant defence of the Anglobitch Thesis. As an
American expatriate and former prison worker, Lawrence has unique
insight into the terrible state of modern gender relations across the
Anglosphere. His piece was over 10 000 words in length, and placed as multiple
comments on a previous post by Legal Eagle. Here is Part II:

Like I said, every man in the Anglosphere is a target of this machine,
but wealthy American and Canadian men are the hardest hit, because the US legal
system gives family court judges wide latitude, which really can’t be appealed,
to place arbitrarily high demands on the incomes of men who have been wealthy
at any point. This is why Robin Williams committed suicide. At one point he was
a very wealthy Hollywood A-lister. But after his two divorces, he was no longer
pulling in that kind of money. The family courts didn’t care. They said he once
made big money, and in the fantasy unicorn filled land of US family courts,
that meant he could just click his feet together and make the same money again.
So they made Robin pay out the nose for alimony. By this time he was sick with
Parkinson’s Disease he couldn’t make anywhere close to that amount of money,
and his lawyer was warning him that prison time was likely coming. So he
committed suicide. Here’s another famous case, a guy in New York with same sort
of situation, once made a lot of money on Wall Street and became upper class,
told to pay alimony every year after that at insane high levels, lost his job
in recession== then off to prison when it became impossible.

Wealthy men across the US, Canada, UK and the Anglosphere generally are hit hard
like this. And yes, a lot of them wind up in prison. The incarceration rate in
Canada and the UK isn’t quite as bad, but this happens there too because the
misandrist structure of the laws and family courts is as bad as in the USA, and
the legal systems share the same insane practice of imprisonment after
court-ordered impoverishing of a man. I found this out ironically after I
expatriated and was working as a Web and database planner, when my previous
experience led prison systems in many countries to contract me to help with
their intake software and legal briefing documents. This imprisonment of men
for marriage or kids (or in these #metoo days, just for “harassment” that in
reality is “any interaction with women”) really is an Anglo phenomenon
uniquely. Whatever stupid idiosyncrasies the rest of the West has with
feminism, they don’t throw men in prison for this.

The very worst case I saw as a prison guard was a surgeon, yes an American
surgeon who was one of the most respectable guys I ever met, hard working,
worked until 2 a.m. 6 days a week to save people’s lives. With all the work
hours, his wife got “lonely” and started sleeping around, eventually having 2
kids that weren’t even his as he found out later. And then she filed for
divorce so she could take the surgeon’s money, blow it on cocaine and stupid
luxuries for herself without doing any work herself (that’s the real
destination where the “child support” money goes) and sleep around with her
favorite Chad of the week, all on her hard working surgeon ex-husband’s money.
She won an insanely high judgment in a US family court, millions of dollars in
child support and “alimony” that the poor surgeon would have to pay. Since by
the court’s judgment, “she should be entitled to maintain the same standard of
living after the divorce”, even though this greedy gold-digging Anglobitch is
the one who filed for the divorce to steal from her hard-working husband who
was actually saving people’s lives.

After a few years of doing this, and losing his house and his nice car,
the poor surgeon threw out his back while helping a patient onto an operating
table. He had to cut down his hours as a surgeon, and went to the divorce court
asking for a reduction in the support demands, and ask that his lazy, spoiled
brat bitch ex-wife get a damn job herself. But the court refused using the same
delusion filled imputation bullshit they pull on other ex-husbands, claiming he
could somehow make millions of extra dollars using his surgical wizard skills
somehow. Which he couldn’t do in reality with his injured back, something the
family court judge couldn’t or wouldn’t even try to understand. So then now the
alimony and child support were demanding 120% of his income. You see, the
family court system will never let you off the treadmill once they target you,
especially if you earn a lot of money. Eventually he drained his savings and
retirement, couldn’t make the payments at all—and he wound up in the prison
where I was a corrections officer.

The corrupt American family court-media-feminist-academia cultural Marxist-big
business-prison industrial complex had worked perfectly to ruin this poor man,
and what a prize they had. A dedicated, hard working US surgeon, saving lives
every day, drained of his money and reduced to poverty by a gold-digging,
spoiled greedy bimbo who divorced him due to his very dedication, had kids with
other men to force him to pay bullshit “child support” in addition to
never-stopping alimony, his assets taken by his gold-digging ex wife and the
state to grease their own corruption, the “child support” in actuality
supporting the ex wife’s corrupt, hedonistic lifestyle after divorce. And then
the poor surgeon himself made a literal slave in a US prison, stripped of his
license and made a perpetual debtor, worked to the bone but never allowed to
profit from his own efforts or hard work. That really is how it works in the US
family court and prison system. That poor surgeon was the worst case we ever
saw, made us so mad we were talking about how we were going to “free the
Bastille” and start a revolution ourselves to stop all the corruption,
Robespierre style. And free all the innocent men, and even some women, who were
imprisoned this way, to feed more slaves to the machine.

Because if you’re an American man, particularly a rich, well to do, middle
class or upper class man with skills, saved money, assets, wealth and a good
job, that’s what you really are. Fresh meat for the Anglosphere family court
meat grinder machine. Like Legal Eagle said, you are literally a slave with
marriage or child-bearing in the US or the greater Anglosphere, from that day
on, the state and officials have full purview over all your assets and
unlimited ability to seize them. Legal Eagle saw this from the legal debate and
court side, I saw the horrible result from the prison side, where men were sent
after all their assets had been stolen by the family courts and their only
further “value” was as slaves to the prison-industrial complex. This shit’s
real, guys.

And now, in the ugly aftermath of #metto, #timesup and #nameandshamehim, you
don’t even have to get married or have a kid in the Anglosphere to become a
slave. Any interaction with a women, even something as casual as a glance or an
innocent conversation, opens you up to charges of harassment and sexual
misconduct. And given that as much as half of young white women in America find
even innocent male female interactions to be harassment, you’re in great danger
at any moment. Many harassment and misconduct changes now are being assembled
by our corrupt legal-prison-industrial complex system to become prosecutable
offenses. But even short of that, the witch-burning in social media means that
any vague accusation, whether recent or months or years ago, will make you
unemployable and a social pariah. You’ll lose your health insurance and ability
to earn a living, and then the state will have all kinds of additional ways to
brand you a criminal and toss you in jail.

Now on to one more thing Legal Eagle talked about, which is precisely why the
Anglosphere poses such a unique and lethal risk to men in general, and husbands
and fathers specifically, while other countries including others in the West
and Europe do not, despite the poisonous fumes of Anglosphere and especially
American culture. I’m not an expert in legal history or common and civil law
like Legal Eagle is with his attorney experience, but as a LEO (we corrections
officers are classified as this just like police officers are) we do need to
understand at least the essence of the law. Our job is to enforce it after all.
I’ll do like Legal Eagle and spell right out, best I can, just why the
Anglosphere legal and culture tradition has turned into a monstrous machine so
deadly for men, and for normal women who want to start a family, and why
expatriation now is the only option.

As reminder I’m in France now, have been for years, and as a Web designer who’s
often called on to help with the software used for prison intakes and legal
briefings for law enforcement personnel, I also get a lot of international
contract experience. I don’t want to claim the non-Anglo world is a paradise,
yes we do have dumb, shrill and annoying feminists here too. But there really
is a huge difference away from the Anglosphere because the feminists have
nowhere the level of the power or cultural approval they do in the Anglosphere,
and in France and throughout Europe, are shunned and ridiculed by even the
mainstream media and society. The misandry is combatted in a lot of surprising
ways, the safety nets are open to men as well as women here, the “sock it to
him” attitude of the USA is throttled, people are cooler with nudity and
sexuality so harassment isn’t an issue. But it’s really the legal structure
that matters most in making things so lethal for Anglosphere men compared to
the protections of the non-Anglo world ruled by civil law. Even if I don’t know
the fine legal points of common law against civil law like Legal Eagle, I can
tell you pretty specifically how they’re so different in practice, and why the
civil law countries are a far better choice for Anglo men and sensible women,
above all for professional and wealthy men, to expatriate to, settle down and
have families.

a. Practically speaking, “common law” means Anglosphere law, while “civil law”
which comes from Roman law, is continental law, used in Europe, in South
America which is continental-based, eastern Europe, and apparently in a lot of
Asia, which for some reason has copied a lot of civil law practices. (I’m a lot
less familiar with Asia so I’ll trust Legal Eagle’s word on that). In the USA,
Canada, UK and Anglosphere generally, common law in practice means judges have
much more latitude to impose harsh and arbitrary penalties, which they’ll often
feel free to do if they’re riding political currents and punishing a group that
isn’t “politically correct”. This also creates a toxic legal atmosphere in the
Anglosphere which attracts the most militantly feminist female lawyers to
become family court judges in a sort of selection process. Like I said I don’t
know the fine points of common law like Legal Eagle, but I did see how it
played out in practice in US family courts when we were briefed on the court
proceedings for inmates who had been confined for nonpayment of child support
or alimony.

And it was very clear from the transcripts that the PC memes of feminist “you
go girl” culture and the spewings of cultural Marxist academic journals had
found their way into the American family court judges’ rulings, where the man
was automatically assumed to be a deadbeat and loser deserving punishment. Yes,
even lifesaving surgeons with back injuries were thrown into this pile, and
while misandrist feminist judges were the usual culprits, there were plenty of
stupid male white knight family judges doing the same bullshit. I’ve heard some
people claim that Jewish family court judges male and female were particularly
inclined to go the misandrist route, but tbh I’m not sure I really saw this, I
think they were maybe overrepresented in general among the lawyers and judges,
but plenty among both the stupid white knights and the hate-filled feminist
judges ready to incarcerate some poor ex-husband for child support or alimony
arrears, were old fashioned Anglo Protestants. Especially up in New England
where I worked early in my career as a corrections officer. It’s clearly
something in Anglo culture that combines with Anglo common law to fuel this
insanity in the judges, possibly the strange combination of cuck-like chivalry
by some men and zero-sum radical feminist hatred, unique to the Anglosphere,
that maybe one of the other commenters made a note of.

The lesson to draw here is that it’s the “playing with fire” basis of Anglo
common law that makes this possible in the Anglosphere, as I’ll explain, civil
law countries reign in judges and don’t let them do this. The essence of common
law in practical sense, is that the law is based not just on prior court
precedent but also—and this is the main point—on “broad political currents” in society
that the court supposedly interprets. Despite the US Constitution, which is
essentially statutory law, the common law, which predates the Constitution
itself, means family court judges in the US and general Anglosphere can “go
with the PC cultural flow” which family courts in France, Germany, Norway,
Brazil, Chile and the non-Anglosphere in general cannot do. And when rampant
misandry and “sock it to ‘em”—even against a lifesaving surgeon whose
gold-digging wife had 2 kids with other men—is the cultural current, US and
Anglosphere judges have latitude to “go with it” and formalize the misandry in
their decisions.

The common law, I suspect, is also why the Anglosphere, and I guess Israel from
what Legal Eagle is saying (haven’t been there so can’t say personally), is
unique in the way judges and the state have full purview to review and seize
all of a man’s assets. The civil law of the continent in Europe makes that a
no-go because judges are handcuffed legally, while the common law gives
Anglosphere judges a lot more power over men’s finances. Combine that with the
selection for feminazi lawyers to become family court judges, steeped in the
latest misandrist bile from the media and women’s studies journals from
academia, and boom, you have a formula for turning “sock it to him” into formal
rulings by judges to seize all a man’s assets. Especially a wealthy man, who’s
a juicy and favorite target for the unholy alliance of radical feminist
Anglosphere family courts with the profiteering lawyers and prison-industrial
complex, particularly in the United States.

This is the “laymen’s term” explanation for what Legal Eagle was saying: Anglo
common law means that practically, a family courtjudge in the US and
Anglosphere is a little dictator with uncontrolled and unappealable power to
make state pronouncements that a man must ‘pay up” unrealistic amounts that add
up to more than 100% of his assets and salary. And make him a pauper. There is
no restriction on the delusional imputation that a family court judge can do
with spousal support and child maintenance expectations for a man.

The judge in the Anglosphere can cite, as precedent, both previous
decisions but even “flavor of the moment” social movements like #metoo and
whatever misandrist junk is being spilled out in US university academic
feminist journals, since an Anglosphere judge has so much latitude.

Not so in the non-Anglo world, especially in Europe and South America which is
continent-influenced and where civil law rather than common law prevails. This
is really where continental civil law from Europe shows its virtues—it’s in its
essence more rational than Anglo common law, and by its very nature it imposes
strict limits on what a judge can do, and how much of a man’s assets a judge,
and thus the state, can review and effectively take control of. Again guys like
Legal Eagle will know about this more than I would, but after being in France
for a while and trying to master my French, I read a French language book that
talked about how the Romans came up with law. They were almost scientific about
it, a lot of philosophy and long term thinking, and that’s the heart of civil
law that dominates almost every country outside the Anglosphere. Above all the
Romans were realistic about how human passions of the moment could corrupt the
law courts, and they were very frank about how women in particular, would too
often get caught up in what we now know as misandrist hate campaigns like
#metoo and the “sock it to him” hatemongering of divorce courts. That’s why
civil law in effect protects men from harm and makes marriage and family
formation possible outside the Anglosphere, and that’s true even in countries
that, like in Scandinavia, have opened themselves up too much to many of the
stupidities of Anglo-American culture. Despite this, the civil law tradition
even in Scandinavia shields men in actual practice, something they don’t have
in common law-dominated Anglo clountries.

In the practical terms of family courts themselves, family court judges in
civil law countries are kept on a much tighter leash than common law Anglo
countries, so the PC feminist “flavor of the moment” is irrelevant—the statutes
are what matter, not vague prior “precedents” or media-driven memes like in the
Anglosphere. That’s why, like Legal Eagle said, child support in the non-Anglo
world is strictly capped, why alimony is almost nonexistent. The non-Anglo
world is much safer for men in general, especially for upper-class and wealthy
men, because the caps are kept deliberately low by the civil law legislative
process. This stupid Anglo standard, that after divorce “a woman should be
entitled to maintain the same lifestyle as during marriage”? The non-Anglo
countries call bullshit on that. By civil law codes, if a woman files for
divorce, she then has to get off her ass and earn her money herself. And they
HATE gold-diggers in Europe, which the civil law formalizes. It doesn’t matter
if the man has been a millionaire surgeon, like the poor unfortunate inmate I
worked with, or a billionaire industrialist—a divorcing spouse is not entitled
to his fortune, whether he made it before or during the marriage. She’ll get
only enough to provide basic support for herself and her kids given cost of
living, and beyond that she has to work. A wealthy husband will customarily
contribute more to help her get job prep at the start, and a husband who’s
having tough times or just lost his job will be given a break to get on his own
feet.

Generally the civil law that Legal Eagle talks about, means that men in the
non-Anglo world can marry, have kids, divorce if it comes to that, without
putting their assets at risk. Because not only is there no alimony, but child
support is kept low and works differently, as the woman filing for divorce is
expected to work and do the supporting herself. Again this shows the
rationality of the civil law which is developed by community leaders with long
term thinking, as opposed to divorce law and family court judges with a
feminist chip on their shoulder, swayed by the PC whims of the moment. The
“playboy rule” that I and I think Legal Eagle are describing above, is done
this way for a reason. It discourages divorce for one thing, so non-Anglo
Europe and South America have much less of it than the Anglosphere. It also
encourages shared custody, since a woman gets no advantage from profiteering
through the child support bullshit which usually just supports a custodial
parent’s excessive lifestyle. It means men don’t go to prison, since child
support is low, it doesn’t “rack up” and there’s no alimony. It also means that
lawyers, judges, states and the prisons don’t get to be gluttonous greedy pigs
like in the US, UK and Canada, since you can’t profit from the divorce process,
like I saw time and time again with all the poor ex-husbands sent to the
prisons I was assigned to.

This in laymen’s terms is what Legal Eagle was saying in his first point, the
civil law of Europe, South America, east Europe, everywhere outside the
Anglosphere is a far better protection of a man’s assets, wealth and freedom
than any prenup, because it totally changes the math and economics of divorce,
takes away the incentive for it, prevents profiteering and makes custody
shared. That’s why, even if feminists and dumb Anglo culture get into non-Anglo
countries, they’re tightly shackled in what they can actually do. It really is
true, I have seen this. Feminism and dumb Anglo-PCism are laughed at in France,
Austria, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Belgium and east Europe, and whiny
feminists especially here in France are vocally mocked and marginalized, but
they do have some currency in Germany and Scandinavia, which makes them a
little too vulnerable to stupid PC fads and feminist farts from the
Anglosphere. (Although as I’ll get to below, Nordic and German feminism really
is a breed apart from misandrist Anglo feminism).
Yet despite this, the actual process of marrying and divorce in Germany and the
Nordic countries has the same legal structure, with the same statutory
protections as men enjoy in France and the Mediterranean, and it’s because
those countries also follow the civil law instead of the common law of the
English-speaking countries. If the feminist harpies from the Anglosphere came
to Germany or the Nordic countries, they could bleat all they want, but they
have no power to ruin a man in a divorce as is routine in the Anglosphere. And
so men in Germany and Scandinavia, especially upper class and wealthy men, have
their assets walled off and protected from the state the same as we do in
France. If a woman files for divorce in northern Europe as much as France or
southern Europe, she doesn’t get to do any gold-digging, and if she has a rich
husband, she isn’t entitled to his wealth. The statutory limit is deliberately
kept low to discourage divorce and encourage custody sharing, and if she still
goes ahead and files, she is responsible for getting off her ass and getting a
job. No freebies on a husband’s dime, whether he’s rich or not so rich.

b. The different feminisms of the Anglosphere as opposed to the
non-Anglosphere. I know Rookh was bringing this up as a main topic, and when it
comes to things like sociology and cultural history I’m really not too
familiar, so I can’t really comment with the depth a lot of you guys have here.
But I can say this from direct observation, the feminism of Scandinavia and
Germany really is a world apart from the hate-filled, virulent misandrist
madness of the Anglosphere, and ironically it further serves to help northern
European men and protect them from divorce or #metoo-like harassment witch
hunts. This isn’t so easy to explain to people in the Anglosphere because the
cultural framing of reference in Europe is so different, but I guess here’s the
essence of it.

Consider for a moment a European country infamous for its loud, obnoxious
feminists, say Norway, Sweden or Finland. For the poor guys stuck in the
Anglosphere, as I was until I expatriated, when we hear “feminists” even
overseas, we instantly think of the vitriol-filled, openly misandirst American,
Canadian or British harpies like Emily Lindin at Teen Vogue. For those who
don’t know, she was the disgusting bitch in the middle of the #metoo
witch-hunting who wrote on Twitter a few months ago, ““if some innocent men's
reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that
is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.” This is the character of
Anglosphere feminism: it’s shrill, resentful, spiteful, malicious and clearly
full of hatred, less concerned with helping women than with doing damage to Anglo
men in any way possible. (If these crazy feminists really wanted to help women,
they’d campaign against the oppression in Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia).

So what about the feminists in Norway, Sweden, Germany, Denmark and Finland
which had feminist traditions even before North America? It really is a totally
different form of feminism. The feminists up there in Nordic-land and Germany
can be shrill and loopy in their own way, yes. But up there, the feminism isn’t
misandrist, and they aren’t obsessed with this “evil oppressive patriarchy” the
way Anglosphere feminists are. For the Nordic feminists, it’s more about true
independence, sexual freedom and yes, actual egalitarianism. They hate the
#metoo thing up there because they think it makes women look weak. They hate
alimony for the same reason, in fact of all ironies, it was Nordic and German
feminists who led the push decades ago to abolish alimony and restrict child
support. And even to help institute paternity leave as well as maternity leave to
encourage fathers to be with their young kids. It sounds crazy to us in the
Anglosphere because “feminism” here is something so much nastier and misandrist
by definition, but the feminists up in Nordic-land in Germany in general aren’t
misandrist and in fact do a lot of things that are very husband and
father-friendly. Yes, they can irritate sometimes with their own “you go girl”
talk and be a little standoff-ish at times, but to a surprising extent, most of
them are actually reasonable, and mainly focused on making sure that girls and
women have opportunities to explore and be creative—without doing this at the
expense of boys and men.

And you’ll be relieved to know that despite the cultural excrement floating in
from the Anglosphere, Anglo-style feminism really isn’t catching on there.
That’s in part due to the fact that German and Nordic universities are
structured so differently, they focus on gaining real skills and frown on
Anglosphere bullshit like gender and women’s studies programs that for the most
part are just high tuition welfare for PC feminists and administrators. But
it’s also because the northern European feminists just plain don’t like the
Anglo style of feminism. (And like I said, the French, Austrians, southern and
eastern Europeans just don’t like feminism at all).

As to why this is, I have my own theory. I know a lot of you guys have talked
about how the crazy Puritan tradition in the Anglosphere, or maybe the
Victorian era, is responsible for making the Anglo version of feminism so toxic
by making sex itself an item of scarcity that women gain power by making rare,
and that pushes the societies to harmfully separate the genders from an early
age so they don’t understand each other. Now, I’ll say I think there’s
something to this. Repressing male-female sexual interaction in the Victorian
or Puritanical tradition does lead to a lot of societal perversions directly
and indirectly. Directly, I feel like we saw this in the Victorian period, and
today in Afghanistan with the sexually repressed Pashtun tribes that make young
women unavailable for sex before marriage, resulting in men’s schools and clubs
plagued by homosexual weirdness. More importantly, I feel like this does
contribute to the “men are evil” misandry of family courts and #metoo
extremists since it paints any sexual association as evil, and since men in
general are more associated with sexual interest towards women, it means that
Anglo feminists frame their misandry with a lot of Puritanical shaming and
disgust at sex itself.

And the different, more freewheeling attitudes of Europe towards sex and
sexuality are truly a lot different, which probably steers the culture sharply
away from Anglo-style feminism, even among the feminists there. Before my
fiancée joined me in France—and I’ll admit it here, even after we got
married—one of the places I loved to go was up In NE Germany. Tbh German,
Polish, Czech, Swedish and Finnish girls are sexy as hell in general, something
about that Baltic area, and these gorgeous ladies never have hang-ups about
being sexy, attracting men, even being nude or out in thongs in public. When
you talk to them, many will say they’re feminists, but their coziness and lack
of frigidness around being sexual totally changes what feminism means to them.
FWIW I see the same kind of thing down in South America when I’ve been there,
particularly down in Brazil, which is the one country I would have chosen if I
didn’t wind up in Europe. Crazily hot women, independent, often say they’re
feminists but it all means something a world away from Anglo feminism. (In
Brazil, when a girl says she’s feminist what she really means is she likes to
be the one in control in bed). So from that observation I think you guys are
right, the way that Anglo feminists have been conditioned to view sex itself as
dirty and nasty, a hang-up from our Puritan tradition, may contribute a lot to
the nastiness and misandry of US and Anglo feminism.

Still, I think there’s something else at work in the Anglosphere which has to
do with Anglosphere history. Most countries in the Anglosphere were settled by
invading British colonists who pushed out the natives and took slaves. That’s
the history of North America in essence. But this all changed in a nasty and
bloody way for the Anglosphere that was very different from Latin America,
where there wasn’t the history of open and hateful group conflict like there
was in America’s civil war in later history. It just seems like the lines are
more blurred in Latin American countries. So North America, in particular, has
had this nasty history of rival ethnic and racial groups, displacing the
natives and fighting bloody wars against each other, and never came to an
understanding about it. And then cultural Marxism came, whipping up and playing
on these conflicts as a wedge against the West, and it found its most fertile
ground in the Anglosphere. The malicious Anglo feminists of US divorce courts
and #metoo seem to borrow a lot of that group warfare language, and maybe that
combined with the Puritanism has made the Anglo strain very ugly and hostile.

c. This one’s simpler—the media culture of the Anglosphere is a world away from
what we have in Europe, especially in France. That’s part of why #metoo never
caught on in France, Italy or the rest of Europe outside the UK. We just don’t
have that kind of voyeuristic “gotcha” culture that plagues the Anglosphere.
Some anonymous commenter was whining that Catherine Deneuve, Laetitia Casta,
Brigitte Bardot and the other French women luminaries were harshly criticized
in the media after they came out against #metoo. This guy obviously hasn’t been
to France and doesn’t speak French, because he’s totally wrong on this.
Deneuve, Casta and Bardot all speak for the overwhelming majority opinion of
both the French masses and the French elites, who find the #metoo stupidity and
the misandry of US and Anglo family courts to be a laughing stock at the very
least, and a threat to society that should be shunned. This view is shared by
96% of the French people, and the French media openly mock the few French
feminists who try to imitate the Anglo feminists, and whose own attempt at
#metoo here fell totally flat. Caroline de Haas in particular is roundly
ridiculed by French women even more than men as being totally out of step with
French culture and reality in general, and she wound up being a punchline
humiliated by comedians all over the country after her lame response to
Deneuve.

Notice for example the tears of the misandrist mainstream American and other
Anglo media about how #metoo has failed completely in France. They know the
media and culture of Europe spit on the Anglo delusions of cultural relevance
in areas like this, and it burns them up inside.

In fact it’s gotten so hostile and humiliating for these Anglo feminist
imitators that they’re now set to leave France, setting up in, where else, the
UK and Anglo provinces of Canada. In all their whining and butthurt, they say
that the Anglo countries are more receptive to their shrill misandrist
feminism, which itself is telling.

d. Hinting at this before, but something else that makes the Anglo
brand of feminism such a wrecker for men and society, is the Anglo obsession
with money and profits over people, and the stupid worshipping of big business
and corporations. This may sound money coming from me because I’m a business owner,
a hard-core capitalist and was considered right of center when I was in the US.
But these ideology driven lines in the sand confuse more than they reveal
because they’re too damn broad. Yes, I am a capitalist and fully support free
markets for most things in society. But the problem is, too much of what the US
and Anglosphere calls “free market capitalism” isn’t really capitalism at all,
it’s more like lazy cronyist style fake capitalism. This in reality is more
like socialism for the oligarchs and super rich buddies of people in power,
like the third world corruption that rules shitholes like Mexico (yes, I said
it) where a few families hold 90% of the wealth and brutally oppress the
masses, extracting their wealth for themselves.

This is what the US is becoming as it embraces this fake oligarch capitalism
rather than true free market capitalism, and it’s exactly what I saw working as
a corrections officer with the prison-industrial complex in the United States.
Like I said above it’s a big part of why we have the world’s highest rate of
incarcerating in the US, the prisons here are in essence slave labor camps and
plantations that constantly need fresh bodies and more slaves, and it’s a big
part of why the divorce court insanity is so awful in the US and Anglosphere.
For the Anglosphere, every part of the miserable divorce process, and now the
#metoo screaming, is a chance to profit.

Family courts provide a lot of profit
for the lawyers, judges and the states too like Warburton was showing.
Gold-digging ex-wives get huge profits from alimony and child support just like
the states. And then when the Anglo man’s assets are drained dry, especially a
wealthy Anglo man who’s such a rich target, he’s sent as a slave to the
prison-industrial complex to extract his slave labor and further profit, both
private and public prisons do this. Another reason the Anglosphere is so deadly
for a man who wants to hold on to his wealth and start a family. It’s just like
healthcare and college in the Anglosphere, the marriage and divorce court
system, and now the “harassment industry” after #metoo, is another place for
the most corrupt oligarchs in the US to make big profits.

There’s a term for what the Anglosphere has now that economists use, it’s
something like “rentist seeking”. I’m not sure exactly and economics overall is
one of my weak points from college. But whatever the term is, it has something
to do with asshole oligarchs, profiteers and parasites in essence skimming off
the wealth that real producers in society produce, like manufacturers or that
surgeon who got sent to my prison after impossible child support and alimony
demands. It’s yet another reason to expatriate out of the Anglosphere, the
culture no longer values real capitalism, it’s more about profiteering and
extracting money from people who do real work. Which is exactly what American
family courts, and Anglosphere family courts generally are set up to do.

This is maybe another less noticed reason why the non-Anglosphere is
much safer and more welcoming of men, and of women who want to start families,
than the Anglosphere. Business and free market entrepreneurs are greatly valued
in France and Europe, but they care about real capitalism here, not the
cronyism that’s become the big thing for the Anglosphere. This is another
reason why the non-Anglo European and South American countries, and yes this
includes Germany and Nordic-land, so strongly oppose the insanity of US divorce
courts, discourage divorce and prohibit alimony. They just see this as part of
the crazy profiteering and cronyism that’s consuming the Anglosphere economies
from the inside, parasitically. They hate the idea of divorce lawyers and
ex-wives, let alone courts and prisons making profits off something so terrible
as divorce. And they realize there are lots of things in society, like divorce
and health care, where profiteering is a terrible thing. So they forbid it, and
it’s another reason divorce rates are so much lower in Europe, while divorces
in general cause minimal damage to those involved in it.

On this topic I know Legal Eagle said Switzerland was a little different, and
yes I have heard of the Swiss being unusual in the nasty, sometimes US-style
divorces they have there. But as I understand it, that’s because Switzerland is
a bit of an oddball, the last country in Europe to given women voting rights
while still having paternalistic “protections” for women that haven’t caught up
to the reality that women work these days. It’s more of a legislation lag than
anything else, and as Switzerland is a civil law country too, that’s correcting
itself. The Swiss absolutely do not profiteer from divorce the way Americans
and other Anglosphere countries do, the Swiss are sharp eyed capitalists in the
traditional sense.

And another reason why the Europeans and South Americans hate Anglo
profiteering creeping into very inappropriate places, like divorce and family
courts—when people aren’t valued, eventually the society changes out the people
and the demographics change. This is a big reason why the US is already a
majority non-white country in its school-age population, with the rest of the
Anglosphere following suit. Corporations in the US don’t want to train or
support American workers, they want bigger profits fast, and the best way to do
that is to import surplus labor through mass immigration to depress wages.
Short term profit, long term disaster and civil conflict. France has a totally
different perspective. I know the US media likes to go nuts over all the
trouble French Muslims supposedly cause, but in reality they’re only around 3
percent of the population and actually dropping as Muslims and Africans leave
what’s becoming a very culturally strict society now, which I think someone
else mentioned. The same goes for the Swedes, Dutch, Germans, Italians all of
which are much tougher on immigration than Trump could ever dream to be. By
refusing mass immigration this means they have to invest more in their own
people and not profiteer off them. Which means none of this parasitic bullshit
the US loves to pull in things like family courts and healthcare.

e. The last point, and sort of a follow-up on the previous one about what makes
the non-Anglosphere more suited for men and families than the Anglosphere, it’s
the safety-net traditions here. Now, again I know Americans get confused about
this because they’re so used to calling this “socialism” and looking at French
social programs in just left leaning or right leaning terms. But the French
social assistance programs are more properly seen as ways of making sure
society stays harmonious, and this extends to things like family courts and
divorce courts.

Part of why US family law is so stressful, and divorce court judgments are so
harsh and devastating for men, is that there just aren’t good safety nets in
the US and Anglosphere, so Americans are always at each other’s throats trying
to extract money anyway they can. It’s like a state of constant downward
mobility and anxiety, and this contributes both to the tendency for Americans
to divorce, and the grasping and nastiness of divorce itself there. In Europe,
people in general are just less stressed and happier because people aren’t
constantly stressing about going broke from hospital bills or college costs the
way Americans are. This also reduces the divorce rate and stops the ugly side
that Americans show when divorce hits.

One thing I haven’t mentioned yet, is that my wife is actually American
herself, and she moved to France with me. There have been a number of expat
conferences in the US recently drawing American expats in, across the world, to
spread their wisdom to other Americans thinking about expatriating. (A lot of
people at my conference are aware of Rookh’s site, so I’d say there are at
least thousands of men lurking specifically to find about expatriating from the
misandrist mess the US and Canada have become). Anyway, one of the guys I
talked to in the US conference talked about how he and his wife in Washington
State nearly divorced after the costs of their first child, who needed specialized
care, nearly made them insolvent.

This kind of ridiculous economic stress from healthcare, daycare, college
tuition is a lot of what pressures so many couples to actually go ahead with
divorce in the Anglosphere, and it’s something we’re freed of in Europe. My
wife and I also had a complicated birth here in France for our first child, and
yet it cost us nothing. That’s right, $0 other than the parking and lunch. So
something that would have stressed us out like crazy in the United States or
another Anglosphere country, here in France was just a minor little annoyance,
and we’re just happier and more secure here than we could ever be in the US.
There’s an irony for you, I married an Anglo girl from America when I went to
France, but by being in France, she avoided becoming an Anglobitch—she and I
are 100% French now. So if you want to marry your sweetheart in the US, make
sure you both settle down somewhere else!

As bonus, we don’t even pay more taxes here in Europe even though Americans
assume that. Our healthcare costs so much less, and for that matter our family
courts are much quieter and less expensive, plus with far fewer inmates there’s
much less need for what I did in the US as a corrections officer. So things
just cost less in Europe than the Anglosphere and less taxes are needed. I
actually pay less in taxes in France than what I paid while working Rhode
Island in the US! It really is not just worth it, but essential to expatriate
out here or to other countries outside the Anglosphere. You can have a real
family and real quality of life here. With normal relations between men and
women actually loving each other and enjoying each other’s company.

A poster called Lawrence has written a brilliant defence of the Anglobitch Thesis. As an American expatriate and former prison worker, Lawrence has unique insight into the terrible state of modern gender relations across the Anglosphere. His piece was over 10 000 words in length, and placed asmultiple comments on the previous post by Legal Eagle. Therefore I will repost it here in several parts, to be appreciated in its full glory:

Applause for Legal Eagle’s intelligent and historically informed
perspective here. A US-based old buddy of mine got wind of this Blog and suggested
I contrib my own frightening observations as a prison guard to add to what
Legal Eagle said, ‘cuz I’ve seen the neo-slavery impositions of the Anglosphere
and specifically American “family law” system on American men, up close and
personal, in their full brutality. Legal Eagle is dead right, the Anglosphere
really is a uniquely dangerous death trap, in every way, for any man who dares
to even attempt a relationship with women, and especially for those poor souls
who become husbands or fathers particularly in the US. Expatriation, as he
said, really is the only option now.

And I’ll underline something else he said because everyone here needs to be
well aware of this for your own protection, as someone who’s seen too many
wealthy and upstanding American men literally enslaved in US prisons after
divorce: the greatest danger for men in the Anglosphere is actually for wealthy
men and professional men (and oddly enough, for a growing share of non-feminist
non-crazy women), above all those with fiscal discipline, lots of savings,
investments, assets and earning potential. For most potential hazards, your
wealth and assets protect you, but it’s the opposite in the upside down world
of Anglosphere family law. For wealthy and well-paid American men and their
peers in the Anglosphere, marriage, having a kid and yes, now in #metoo world
even striking up a conversation or hooking up with women paint a huge, ugly red
bullseye on your back for the lunatic family court system in North America to
come after you and profit at your expense. Not just to take your assets and
impoverish you, which they absolutely do and which family law gives them full
power to do, but also to toss you into prison. Yes, rich, upper-class and
professional men not only robbed of their assets under full cover of law, but
also thrown in jail, a tyrannical practice unique to the Anglosphere.

I know because I’ve seen this with my own eyes year after year with horrible
repetition, and often for kids that weren’t even from the imprisoned “father”.
Forgive the wall-of-text I’ll be putting up here, but I feel like men in the
Anglosphere, above all the USA don’t understand the very real threat to their
very livelihoods and even status of free citizens they’re facing if they marry,
have a kid or in today’s #metoo inflamed world, even associate with women who
can later hit them with harassment charges. I doubt that even Legal Eagle,
despite his wisdom from practicing family law, could really see this at a gut
level. The MGTOW’s are correct in the corruption they’ve identified in the
divorce court system, but even most of them don’t see the horrible path this
corrupt system eventually leads to. However, it is something you see as a
prison guard with your jail cells filled with men who committed no crime, confined
there because US, Canadian and British family courts have imposed impossible
financial demands on them, literally making them slaves for the
prison-industrial complex to profit off of. This is one of the ugliest sides of
the society wide disaster that the Anglobitch culture has given rise to, and
Rookh was well ahead of his time in putting many of the threads together. In my
former line of work, I saw the horrible, kafka-esque end result of Anglo
misandry and feminazi feminism: total impoverishing, a jail cell, literal
slavery, even for wealthy and highly skilled men. In fact, ESPECIALLY for
wealthy and highly skilled Anglo men, who are this corrupt machine’s favorite
targets in America and the Anglosphere.

Here’s some background. Before I myself went the expat route a few
years ago, I had a job for about 10 years as a corrections officer, building up
some savings and then later as a flexible shift job while taking correspondence
courses in computer graphic and Web design and finishing a Master’s in database
management. I really wasn’t a traditional fit personality wise for a
corrections officer, I’ve always been bookish and nerdy and not really into
rapping knuckles. But my family has been in law enforcement for a few
generations and prison guarding can be a decently paid gig. So I used the job
not only to make money but also observe the US justice system up close, which I
would later be able to generalize to much of the Anglosphere.

And here I have to warn you, if there is any job that will redpill you from
your 1st month on the job into becoming an MGTOW, it’s being a prison guard.
Because you see the effects of the legal Weapon of Mass Destruction that is US
divorce courts and family courts generally right up close. That’s because the
large, large majority of the prisoners we watch over in our jobs aren’t
violent, aren’t dangerous, aren’t even really criminal. They’re either tossed
in the slammer for the “crime” of minor drug possession (not dealing, just
personal possession) or more and more, for contempt of court due to failure to
make alimony or child support payments. And yes, this is a uniquely Anglosphere
practice, mainly US, Canada and Britain. The rate of such imprisonments in
France where I now live and work, and every other country in Europe? Or South
America which follows French and Roman legal tradition? 0%. They simply don’t
do that to men here.

And yes it gets worse for anyone in the Anglosphere, like Legal Eagle said a
terribly big fraction of the men in US or UK prisons for child or spousal
support payments? They’re wealthy and upper-class men, because their assets
give the family kangaroo courts wide authority to impose outrageous and
impossible payment demands on them. This is due to a family judge practice
called “imputation”, which essentially means the judge, completely ignorant of
real economics of actual job and earning potential for a man hit with a divorce
suit, can pull a random number out of her ass and tell the man, “this is what
you should be earning”. And this makes upper class and especially rich men
particularly vulnerable to an enslavement by the family courts. While there are
some idiot white knight male family court judges who do this, it’s mainly naïve
feminist female family court judges who see a man who’s wealthy or has been at
some point, and automatically assume the guy can grow money on trees. They’re
not only feminist idiots, they’re ignorant about business, real hard work or
what it actually takes to earn a lot of money, and how risky and uncertain,
famine to feast a high-earning position or job is. So ironically it’s the
wealthier men who are hit the hardest by family court judgments since the judge
can impute any ridiculous fantasy of what he “should” earn out of her ass,
regardless of reality, and she’ll always pick an outrageously high demand. Then
with any dip in the man’s fortunes or the broader economy, he of course can’t
make the impossible imputed payments, and then boom, it’s off to jail for the
“deadbeat” man even if he’s been a model citizen. I saw this there in the
prisons I worked at, day in, day out. And no, it’s not a bug. It’s a feature of
the insane Anglosphere system. Why you ask?

Chew on this stat for a moment, the United States of America has by a
long shot the highest incarceration rate in the world, about 4 percent of the
world population but getting close to 30 percent of its prisoners, with about
1% of our population in prison in any given year and, depending on the study,
up to a fifth or even a fourth—that’s 20 to 25 percent—of the US population
being jailed for one reason or another at some point as either an adult or a
juvenile, in most cases for charges that turn out to be trumped up or (as with
child support) involve the hazy concept of “contempt”. (And crazy enough,
sometimes the Americans in jail are the “lucky ones”, the USA also has the
highest rate of citizens being shot by our own cops for complete
misunderstandings or trivialities, and whites face just as much danger as
minorities for that these days). And the US imprisonment rate is still rising.
In fact, the United States with 320 million people has more prison inmates than
China and India put together, even though these 2 countries have 2.5 billion
people between them! The reason is obvious: Money. There really is a prison-industrial
complex in the USA, I know because I was a part of it. And it really does make
big money for a lot of people in control of it. It’s the modern day update of
the old plantation slave labor system.

The catch of it is, to make money from a slave economy, you need lots and lots
of slaves, and you don’t want them to be too violent or dangerous either. But
then how do you get normal, law-abiding men (and also many women) into the
heavily profitable US prison slave system, when jail is only supposed to be for
criminals or bad guys? The answer, you simply fill up the prisons with people,
mainly men and preferably white men, who aren’t actually criminals, but who can
be tossed into jail for victimless “crimes” like drug possession. And for
simply doing the thing that humans are biologically programmed for—having
relationships with women and fathering children. So how to drive these decent
law-abiding men into the slave plantations of US prisons? Simple. Create a
vicious, misandrist culture in the USA, and the Anglosphere more generally
where men and particularly white men are vilified, demonized and turned into
objects of hatred and scorn, encourage women at every opportunity to divorce
men and “sock it to ‘em” in divorce court, and now with #metoo, encourage women
all over the workplace, bars, gyms, wherever to start a massive witch hunt
against men for simple flirtation or even looking at them, while lobbying to
make the vaguely defined “sexual misconduct” charge (that is, it’s whatever a
feminazi decides it is) into a punishable offense. And there you have it,
millions of American men and other Anglosphere men ripe for confinement in the
lucrative slave complexes of the Anglosphere, which we call penitentiaries.

Because that’s what the insane, bloodthirsty family court madness of the US
Anglosphere is—an unholy alliance of profiteering interests that unites radical
feminists and cultural Marxists, with government bureaucrats, with corporations
and big business who want to make huge profits off slave labor, and with the
mainstream media and social media that has created a politically incorrect
object of hatred that’s ripe for targeting and enslavement—the men of the
Anglosphere, especially white men. (Notice how quick Mark Zuckerberg was to bow
to radical feminist pressure in censoring “fake news” on Facebook—he wants to
align social media as much as possible with the same misandrist hatred that
rules the MSM and academia).

And
above all, this Anglosphere and above US alliance of dirty interests targets wealthy
white men and a few uppity Asian-American men for “diversity” (I’ve seen this
too in the prisons), after all you guys have far more wealth and assets for the
state and the gold-digging woman in family court to plunder, much more to drain
you dry of before they toss you into prison where you can make a bunch of fat
cats even more profit as a slave. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a public prison
or a private prison, the US and Anglosphere war on husbands, fathers and men on
general is all about the money, ultimately, and they need slaves to make the
big money.

This is why you truly cannot risk marriage or child-rearing in the US or the
English language nations just like Legal Eagle was warning. Above all if you’re
wealthy and have a lot to lose. Like Legal Eagle also said, prenuptial
agreements don’t really help because they’re not designed to, the Anglosphere
needs you as a slave that the vultures in power can get rich pickings off of.
And the numbers back it up. In many of the American prisons I got assigned to,
outside of the drug offenders-- another nonviolent noncriminal group wrongly
incarcerated at outrageous rates—MORE THAN HALF of our inmates were men
incarcerated for falling behind on child support or alimony, or hit with
questionable domestic abuse or sexual misconduct allegations. (And to make this
figure even more terrifying, as it should be if you’re even considering
marriage or child-rearing in the US, all this was BEFORE the #metoo craze which
is going to send those numbers up even higher). The US really is a banana
republic particularly in its prison-industrial complex, but without the nice
weather, beaches, good food and sweet pretty ladies of the countries usually
labeled banana republics.

I know I’m sounding grim with all this, but I’m trying to be honest about all
this and give you all warnings of the real horrors you’re exposing yourself to
with marriage or child-bearing in the English-speaking world, and nowadays even
with male-female associations, because courts in the Anglosphere from then on,
into the indefinite future, have real power to take away your assets and
literally enslave you as a prison inmate. To put this another way, what Legal
Eagle was saying in his post, about how men in the Anglosphere become slaves as
soon as they get married or have a kid—I’m not sure how much even he realized
that this isn’t just a metaphor. It literally is true, and once you’ve been
cleaned out financially, you’re ripe for the slave market of a US family court
that will assign you to your slave plantation—an American prison.

At one point in my corrections officer job, the incarceration of men for child
support and alimony arrears got so bad that a group of us prison guards came to
the warden, complaining that we were being unethically ordered to guard men who
really weren’t a threat and who should have never been sent to jail. Once
imprisoned, they usually lost their professional licenses, their driver’s
licenses, became unemployable so they just wound up back there again. The
warden just shook his head, he knew how corrupt the system is, how the US
family courts, media, politicians, universities, feminists and the prison execs
all work hand in glove to profit off the US slave economy fueled by all the
husbands and fathers tossed into prison. How it creates sick incentives that
encourage divorce and profiteering. (This is another reason the US divorce rate
is by far the highest all over the world, so much money is made from it). But
the warden knew he was powerless to reform it. Just like we were as guards. The
vultures of the Anglosphere want their prison slaves, and husbands and fathers
are an easy target.

I will be posting Part II of this brilliant and insightful article soon.

Tuesday, 23 January 2018

Recently
this blog has been engulfed by a riveting debate on a crucial topic: is
Anglosphere feminism really distinct from the feminism in non-Anglosphere Western nations? And by
extension, is leaving the Anglosphere really the optimal choice for
Anglo-American men who still want relationships with women?

Anonymous
strongly believes that the countries of non-Anglosphere Western Europe, South America
and Asia are at least as bad as those of the Anglosphere:

The
Ripper tells us that: "Give me France any day"

Well, I already wrote about France, but, man, I tell you, Mrs Casta is facing a
bad backlash for her words. She was hated 20 years agou because she was too
much sexy being so young, beautiful and big tits; now they have a political
reason to hate her more.

The same faith for based mommy Catherine Deneuve. You don't have idea when the
feminist machine catch on you with all its force. The fact that a few real
women tell the truth, doesn't mean that the mayority agrees.

Go east, man. (note: the soviet version of feminism was not hatred on men...).

You would think that it's over, that the sitaution couldn't get worse, right?
No, we have the Expat Phil that starts on digging shit.

Europe mainland? srsly?

France is described up.

Sweden is the feminists' hornets' nest, they were the first to cimininalize the
customer of whores and right now the govt is making casual sex a crime unless
you sign a contract with the girl/woman. The cuck governor of sweden is proud
of such a new law.

Norway? Ask Eivind Berge.

Italian courts believe to every possible shit the females say, so the last one
is that a pair of cops have been accused of rape by 2 american (!!!) girls even
if the messages on phones state differently; they will lose the uniform and
risk jail (not that I have any simpathy for the pigs...). If they catch you
cheating on your wife, the court will make you lose everything.

In Greece there is the witch hunt against men who buy sex from refugees
females. German women balme the misconduct of muslim men against white men
patriarchy. Reseved train wagons, reserved swimming pools, free sexual
harassment compliants to the cops in the case you don't meet the girl's
standards, and so on... Many of them treat you like a sexual object, it
happened me with a girl, for whom I was just her fetish; and some turned muslim
(like that very same girl I dealt with, and) like the 16 yo girl named Malvina
who appeared in KIKA, dating a muslim guy (alt rightists made up a shitstorm
because the guy looks "too old for her"... just to keep up with the
AOC theme and the cultural imperialism of the USA and UK).

Do you really like to be surrounded by bikini girls whose ass and tits will
never been yours? Are you a masochist? That's why I support a forced modest
dress code, even more in feminist countries of the west.

Should
I go further?

LatinoAmerica? again, srsly? Have you ever considered the helluva bunch of
feminist new laws passed everywhere? From Venezuela to Colombia? (so you can't
balme communism). And right now that we have the worst pope ever? The black
pope bergoglio? a men hater feminist scumbag like never before. Today he
advocated for even stricter feminist laws for fight what they call
"femicide".

So, if you are a fit, good looking anglo male cunt, don't teach us about how
wonderful european women are, because if you can interest to a german or a
french girl, you can interest to a texan girl from a conservative rural area
too.

Also, pay attention on writing to take care of yourself, because I got the
interest of that german girl for something that is the opposite of being fit.
It's all about her own standards, brothers. Fat or fit, tall or short, etc... and
if she changes her mind, just start on preying your gods, because it will be
rape, even years later.

I only agree with you Phil, about the Israel and the Jewish conspirancy.
Israeli men are in deep shit like the rest of us, and I don't give a shit if the
israeli women at the end want to settle and have kids to fuck up arabs in the
numbers because it's a patriotic duty (and that's true, so you have many ppl
messing about the jewish conspiracy). They are over 30 years old creeps in the
last 3 days of fertility, looking nasty.

James Bond, the best MGTOW is Expat MGTOW (that indeed is not real MGTOW if you
still date or are interested in girls, that is something natural and normal),
but only in countries where feminism is still not strong, or your assets are
enough to make you to have a safe life (examples: philippines and
surroundings). Check out the videos of MGTOW Expat, Kris Cantu and friends. But
Europe is not an option (at least western europe and places like poland or
latvia).

Finally, remember, you all angloamerican patriotic male cunts: this situation
it's all your and your own fault only. It started after the 9/11 with the
collusion between feminism and imperialism against muslims. If you ever served
into an armed force of USA, UK and NATO, you are the source of the problem. Why
in most part of muslim countries men didn't commit suicide before the
imposition of feminism by the west via the bombs?

Allah Hafiz, brothers.

However, Legal Eagle has much personal experience of these issues from his work as an an international lawyer. I am very interested in the law, since it is now the primary feminist weapon in the Anglosphere. More women than men now graduate from Anglosphere law schools, and law is the cultural template via which feminists rewrite Anglo-American society in their own image.

Legal Eagle also considers the distinctive Anglo-Saxon Common Law to be uniquely dangerous to men, marriage and fathers:

Just
wanted to tl-dr the informed points above to sum up in simple terms just WHY
the Anglosphere is so measurably different and DANGEROUS for men compared to
the non-Anglosphere (West and East) when it comes to marriage, divorce, simple
dating, harassment and overall lifestyle and interpersonal relations. I'm an
attorney specializing in family law, now working overseas myself with a basis
to make the comparison, and this is really all you need to know about the
real-life decisions you'll have to make in the Anglosphere versus outside of
it:

--- Marriage and having kids are now fundamentally non-viable options in the
Anglosphere because of one specific quirk above all in the way the Anglosphere
handles divorce: You literally become a slave to the state upon marriage or
having a kid in the Anglosphere because at that point, the state has the power
to extract your assets without limit in the event of divorce, separation or
abuse allegations. Again; ALL of your assets, your savings, earnings, even your
work potential, before or after marriage, can be seized from you after you
marry or have a child in the Anglosphere, because the US court and civil system
gives women and family courts absolute discretion over all your assets and even
future earning potential, WITHOUT LIMIT. Now with #metoo, a variant of the same
unchecked power has also been placed into the hands of the state (courts),
institutions and women with a chip on their shoulder, to bring about complete
ruination and financial damage to a man even outside of marriage, due to any
hazy allegation of "harassment". All of this is reinforced by the
powerful Anglosphere cultural meme of "man = deadbeat".

--- Outside the Anglosphere, especially in old Orthodox and Catholic countries
(Mediterranean, France, Latin America, central and East Europe) and most of
Asia but yes, also in non-Anglo Protestant lands (Germany, the Benelux region,
Scandinavia), the state has no such power over a man after marriage and having
a child. Instead he retains full control over his assets, savings and future
earnings, and all forms of support payments are strictly capped. By the same
token fatherhood is also explicitly supported (hence sharing of custody,
paternal support, mediation), and the #metoo hysterics are dampened both by
cultural disapproval and by explicit laws and policies that forbid a woman from
ruining man's career and reputation through simple allegations. (The defamation
laws are also much tougher in the non-Anglosphere, and women making such
accusations are harshly punished.)

That's
it, the one reason above all why, as this Blog correctly makes clear, the
Anglosphere is fundamentally more dangerous than the non-Anglosphere to basic
rights especially for men, families and rational women. The state and a wife or
ex-wife in the Anglosphere, or even a meddling busybody bureaucrat, has
enormous and essentially unlimited power to drain and enslave a man
financially. This is why you have to ditch the Anglosphere and set up
elsewhere, and this is one area where the MGTOW's are exactly right Simply
dating, associating with women and marrying in the Anglosphere literally and
tangibly-- not in some abstract way-- expose even a highly skilled, wealthy,
upper class men to real risk of improverishment, public humiliation and severe
downward mobility in Anglosphere countries.

This is the difficult and painful message that my old law firm, when we were
speaking honestly, would convey to clients looking for a "solution"
to their concerns about asset exposure to marriage in the US and Canada. If you
marry and or have a kid in the English-speaking world, from that point on you
have a sword of damocles over your head. It's as simple as that, and again, the
MGTOW's are right on here. In fact perversely it's even worse if you're a rich
or upper-class man, all your assets, including anything you've inherited can be
extracted from you under Anglosphere law. On contrary, this is what someone
referred to by the "playboy principle" in the non-Anglosphere-- even very
wealthy husbands can never be asked to pay beyond a statutory and low limit as
support, which does indeed discourage gold-digging since the "lifestyle
standard before divorce" is not a factor.

Just focus on this point and avoid all the distracting issues, because whatever
other cultural factors you're considering, these are the ones that affect you
directly as an individual, and put you at infinitely greater danger of
destitution and disaster in the Anglosphere versus outside it.

And just to throw cold water on any assumptions that "there still must be
a way to safely date and marry in the Anglosphere", I'm sorry, but there
isn't. Like I said above, domestic and international family law is my legal
specialty, what I've done every workday for the past couple decades. I've
worked in dozens of US states, several Canadian provinces and then several law
and legal translation offices overseas in Europe as well as (in 2016) in
Cordoba, Argentina. My law partners and I have seen literally thousands of men
in the US and Canada show up in our office, nervously asking about ways to
protect their assets in the event of divorce, wondering about "the perfect
prenup" or if marrying a religious girl in a religious ceremony, or a
foreign girl protects them. (Short answer-- it doesn't, not if you're still
living in North America or anywhere in the Anglosphere.) I'm sorry, but if you
want to establish a meaningful relationship with a woman, have kids, start a
family-- the things fundamental to any society for centuries-- there is now no
alternative to becoming an expat outside the Anglo world. None.

The
family law policies in the Anglosphere really have become THAT dangerous and
perverse, and now with the #metoo hysterics and media push, it's only going to
get even worse for men, families and reasonable women in the Anglosphere. I
think other posts here have covered why, but if they haven't, here's the tl-dr:
it's due to the particularities of Anglo common law (which is we learn from Day
One in law school, is a whole different animal from civil statutory law), stare
decisis and political/administrative inertia in Anglo legal tradition (feminists
claiming female independence while clinging to "helpless wife"
assumptions used to justify long term alimony), the oppositional essence of US
law, media and culture. And don't think the political system, elections or
either US political party will give you relief. For ex., guess who shot down
two major attempts at alimony reform in Florida and Alabama, both of which have
esp. harsh alimony statutes that hit ex-husbands hard? The foolish pro-alimony
white knights were none other than two "conservative" Republicans,
Rick Scott and Roy Moore. (The real reason Roy Moore lost the Alabama Senate
election is that he imposed permanent alimony payments on a major Alabama
publisher who was understandably embittered-- the things you learn working in
family law.)

If it wasn't clear already, pre-nups offer very limited protection that's all
but useless amidst the full discretion of divorce court judges, esp. after kids
are born but even before-- even my own ex-law firm partners virtually laugh
when husbands request them now, they simply don't help. Not "marrying a
good girl" or "marrying a Christian or religious girl". Here's a
nasty stat for you: the biggest jump in divorce, esp. nasty expensive divorces,
in past decade has been among Christian and esp. Mormon women (!). Not marrying
a foreign woman in the US-- once under US law, she'll have the same power to
ruin you as an American woman, and fall under the same poisonous "deadbeat
man" Anglosphere cultural influences that push other "nice women of
good character" to divorce in Anglo countries.

Since
I guess concrete paths to expatriation are becoming a topic here, f.y.i. my
ticket overseas was to do legal translation. This is not only one of the
easiest but also most lucrative paths to expatriation and you can do it even
before getting fluent in another language, since there's such heavy demand for
translation of documents and policy reports from the US and UK into the major
languages of other (esp. European) countries. And yes, I got started in Sweden
before focusing more on Continental law and translation now. And yes, it is
true. Although Scandinavia, Benelux and Germany do have more traits in common
with the Anglosphere, they are indeed worlds better because they reject the
fundamental principles that make marriage and divorce (and now, even dating and
harassment) so dangerous to men in the Anglosphere. The only other
non-Anglosphere countries that come close are actually Switzerland (which does
have some nasty divorces of its own, but still nowhere near the same damage,
level or frequency as the Anglosphere) and Israel (which is the only country as
bad as the Anglosphere).

I grew up in a traditional religious family myself, my father and mother are
among the fairly few American couples who not only stayed married but actually
happily so. And even for me and my brothers, my parents have urged us to never
get married in the US. They've soon too many friends and neighbors get ruined.
Expatriation is the only option. Save your earnings, sell your assets while you
can (esp. now that the equity and property markets are at such high) and use
your savings to head out of the Anglosphere, A.S.A.P. People here have been
giving some good options-- France, Mediterranean or other Catholic/Orthodox
countries in southern/central/east Europe or Latin America, Russia/former USSR,
non-Anglo Protestant (Germany/Benelux/Scandinavia), most of Asia. But anywhere
else will spare you from the literal slavery and vulnerability to asset
destitution that greets you upon marriage or childbearing in Anglosphere
countries. Don't listen to any idiots who whine stupidly about how
"France, Germany, the non-Anglosphere has feminists and #metoo too".
Yes, and they also have no power to ruin you in marriage and divorce let alone
dating overseas, because the structure of the laws is fundamentally different,
the oppositional cutlural nature of the Anglosphere is absent, and the overall
culture even in very modern non-Anglo countries like Japan, Korea, Scandinavia,
Germany and France still emphasizes traditional feminine responsibilities while
honoring the importance of fatherhood. The whiny feminists overseas are
powerless there, drowned out by institutions and the 99% of people who value
fairness and reason.

Warburton weighs in with unstinting support for Legal Eagle's brilliant monograph, adding a few importantinsights of his own:

A
great deal of wisdom here LE, thank you for sharing. A couple add-ons to your
great points, not only do crazy feminists, technocrats, and judges have the
legal power to reduce men, families and rational women to destitution in the
Anglosphere, they actually do. In terrifying numbers. The risk of financial
calamity from marriage and divorce in the English-speaking world, and as you
say now from just dating or workplace association, isn't just theoretical. It's
real, and very frequent. More than three-fifths of American marriages collapse
in divorce, and its' very ugly and expensive there and in Anglo-world in
general. We're talking tens or millions of men and families, across the
Anglosphere, brought to ruin and financial collapse by divorce or a miserable
marriage even it stays together.

You covered most of these bases. I'd also add that divorce is a huge profit
center, not just for the divorce lawyers, the courts, judges, even states make
big money from divorce settlements. O worked as a paralegal for several years
myself while taking night classes,and saw another ugly truth about why child
support and spousal support demands in North America are out of control and,
unlike outside-the-Anglosphere, have no limit: courts and states get a nice
little cut of alimony and child support as "processing costs", at
least in many states. So when states don't raise taxes explicitly to meet all
their deficits, they go after husbands and fathers with a brutal "secret tax"
in family courts to make up the difference.

Plus, a point to add to your great expat advice: Another way for Americans, to
get to Europe at least, is to find someone in their family-trees who came from
the Old Country. If you have a Greek, Swedish or Italian ancestor somewhere,
you're golden, and this is the fastest way to get there. I'm off to Italy later
this year myself, hired as a statistician. But my cousin is using her traced
roots to get there right along with me next year,and with full citizenship. Use
every advantage you can.

Amidst such brilliant debate, I can only add that sexual freedom in the non-Anglosphere West is certainly under threat from the Anglosphere nations (especially the imperialistic United States). The case of CubaDave Strecker proves that, in spades. Yet the fact remains that misandrist, puritanical feminism is very much an Anglosphere meme (as I have always argued); and while the struggle for sexual freedom in the Anglosphere is probably lost, the struggle for the non-Anglosphere West is still fluid and contested.